The judge lists out defects in Akbaruddin Owaisi Attack Case – Mohammed Pahelwan and 9 others set free

Hyderabad: The court pronounced its historic judgment of Akbaruddin Owaisi Attack Case yesterday in which Mohammed Pahelwan and 9 other accused were released whereas four persons were found guilty. They were given 10 years imprisonment. The other party failed to prove charges against Mohammed Pahelwan.

VII Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Dr. T. Srinivas Rao pronounced his 98 page judgment at 12:30 p.m. yesterday in which Mohammed Bin Omer Yafai alias Mohammed Pahelwan, Younus Bin Omer Yafai, Mohammed Bahadur Ali Khan alias Munawar Iqbal, Esa Bin Younus Yafai, Yahiya Bin Younus Yafai, Afif bin Younus Yafai, Saif bin Maqbool Yafai, Faisal Bin Ahmed Yafai, Fazal Bin Ahmed Yafai and Mohammed Ameruddin were exonerated.

The judge convicted Hasan Bin Omer Yafai, Abdullah bin Younus Yafai, Awad bin Younus Yafai and Mohammed Salim bin Dahlan to ten years rigorous imprisonment after they were found guilty under IPC section 307, 326, 147, 148, 324, 341, 353.

The court also imposed fines worth Rs. 1000 and Rs. 500 per head to all the four convicted persons. The judge included six year period which they spent in Cherlapally Jail.

The judge did not accept evidence produced before him and pointed out the reasons for not accepting them.

He further noted that Mohammed Pahelwan and others cannot be convicted under IPC 120-B since enough and clear evidence was not produced before him. The opponent advocate requested the court to punish the accused on the basis of statement of witness number 14, call record of Mobile phone and the arrival of Mohammed Pahelwan on the spot of the incident after the attack. The judge observed that the evidence produced before the court was childish. He mentioned that witness number 14 went to Omer function hall, Chandrayangutta to book it for celebrating his wedding anniversary wherein he overheard the conversation of Mohammed Pahelwan and others in which a conspiracy was hatched to murder Akbaruddin Owaisi.

Responding to this claim, the judge observed that its first aspect is that the function hall is the property of Mohammed Pahelwan and the second aspect is that no person who belongs to his opposition party can book his function hall. The third important aspect is that no person hatches a conspiracy to murder anyone and talks it loudly so that a third person could overhear it. In addition to it, another important aspect is that the eyewitness did not mention anything till five days of the incident. The matter to be seriously considered is that a person cannot keep quiet for such a long time when a conspiracy was being hatched about the brother of his party president. It is therefore, the statement of the witness number 14 cannot be taken as true. The eyewitness belongs to MIM party. The advocate of Mohammed Pahelwan produced photographs which depict that he is a strong supporter of MIM. The fact that Mohammed Pahelwan reached the spot after Akbaruddin Owaisi was taken to the hospital cannot be taken cognizance since the head of the family would reach the spot to know the facts about the murder of his nephew, Ibrahim bin Yonus Yafai who was shot dead by the bullet. His other two nephews, Abdullah Yafai and Awad Yafai were also injured seriously with bullets. On the aspect of giving punishment to the accused based on the data of the mobile phone, the judge observed that it is quite natural that as head of the family, the person could contact anyone. This cannot be suspected. After the incident, any person can talk to others on the telephone which cannot be taken as a conspiracy.

Due to the pronouncement of the judgment of Akbaruddin attack case, Nampally Criminal court was turned into a police camp. Senior police officials were posted there. Police made elaborate security arrangements in the premises of criminal court. Heavy police force was deployed and latest HD CCTV Cameras were installed so that the entry of unconcerned persons could be checked.

It may be mentioned that on 30th April 2011, Central Crime Station had registered a case in connection with the attack on Chandrayangutta MLA, Mr. Akbaruddin Owaisi in which Mohammed bin Omer Yafai alias Mohammed Pahelwan, 12 of his family members and Munawar Iqbal was arrested and sent to jail. They have been in prison for the past 6 years and 2 months at Cherlapally jail. During the attack, gunman, Janimiyan opened fire as a result of which Mohammed Pahelwan’s nephew, Ibrahim bin Yonus Yafai was killed. After few months of the arrest of Mohammed Pahelwan and others, they were released on bail but police approached the Supreme Court and got their bails canceled. The Supreme Court ordered the lower court to complete the case within 6 months. The hearing of the case was started on 9th February 2016 in which the statements of 83 witnesses were recorded which includes the statements of Akbaruddin Owaisi and Ahmed Balala (MLAs). Govt. of Telangana appointed Senior Advocate of High Court, Uma Maheswar Rao as Special Public Prosecutor whereas, on behalf of Mohammed Pahelwan and others, a team of lawyers consisting of GV Gurumurthy, Raj Vardhan Reddy, Achuta Reddy and others was appointed. Mohammed Muzaffarullah Khan also pleaded the case at the initial stages.

In the chargesheet, it was alleged that Akbaruddin Owaisi was attacked on the basis of the conspiracy hatched by Mohammed Pahelwan and that this conspiracy was hatched at Omer Gulshan Function Hall. The police failed to prove a criminal conspiracy under section 120-B. The court declared an eyewitness Rahmatullah Taiyab as a liar when it was proved during interrogation that he is an active worker of MIM. On the basis of the call data of Mohammed Pahelwan, his guilt could not be proved.

For the past 6 years, Mohammed Pahelwan and others were in jail.

List of defects of Akbaruddin Owaisi Attack Case according to the judge:

  1. Evidence produced against the accused childish
  2. The accused could not be punished under 120-B
  3. Marriage hall is the property of Mohammed Pahelwan and how can a member of his opponent party book this function hall?
  4. The conversation of conspiracy cannot be pronounced with louder voice
  5. The call data of Mohammed Pahelwan’s phone after the incident of attack cannot be treated as a conspiracy.
  6. The arrival of MIM worker, Rahmatullah for booking the function hall is ridiculous.
  7. Why did eyewitness keep quiet till five days of the incident and did not inform his party president about the conspiracy hatched for killing his brother?


–Siasat News